We get around.

The “Best Place” is no place at all

This is the front of the city hall in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, Money Magazine’s “Best Place to Live” in 2010.

Rather, this is the entrance to the massive parking lot that surrounds the city hall. There’s no town square, no park, and not a single business within walking distance of city hall. There’s only one sidewalk to access city hall by foot, on one side of the street (and in the picture, the sidewalk is blocked with a “sidewalk closed” sign further up the road at the corner). It sits next to a rentention pond that appears to have been created to collect the runoff for the huge parking lot. The building is a low-rise, two-story building that appears to be the length of about three football fields. The building has no true front door, but rather several entrances that keep its citizens from having to traverse an entire parking lot just to get in.

Money stated in its description of Eden Prairie that it “doesn’t have much of a downtown.” That’s a lie; it literally has no downtown at all. The entire town is made up of suburban sprawl, office parks, strip malls, and a big hulking indoor retail monstrosity known as Eden Prairie Plaza surrounded by acres of parking without a tree in sight. There is no sense of place in Eden Prairie. How, then, can it be one of the best places to live?

Obviously, there’s also no prairie in Eden Prairie. Isn’t this part of a joke? It’s like when someone says that developers of sprawl cut down trees and then name streets after them.

To be fair, much more walkable cities like Newton, MA and Fort Collins, CO also cracked the top ten. But if this anti-social, obesity-inducing, sprawl-choking town is what Money thinks is the best place to live in the United States, Money has a really warped sense of what makes a place great.

Mark, I think you’re missing my point entirely. It doesn’t matter how many people work for great companies in your town if they’re constantly stuck behind the wheel of a car whenever they’re going anywhere. If you can’t walk to the store, to a restaurant, or anywhere else, you’re missing out on opportunities to socialize with your neighbors, meet new people, and take in some fresh Minnesota air. Eden Prairie is designed around a car, not around people. To me, that doesn’t make it a place I’d ever want to live.

Let’s just agree that your definition of a “great place to live” is different than mine.

I’m a former resident of a suburban community in Iowa currently living in New York, New York. I formerly lived in the Boston area. In the latter two places, I walked everywhere. People don’t meet new people walking around. That’s just not how it works. Also, no one talks to their neighbors in these cities. Who would want to? You’re surrounded by people all the time when you have to walk everywhere. That’s not to say there aren’t other advantages to living in these cities. But don’t portray them as a utopia just because fewer people drive.

Jim, you’re right. But they do meet at small businesses and public areas frequented by locals who come by foot. If you pass someone you know even vaguely on foot, you’re much more likely to strike up conversation with them than if you pass by them in a car.

“Safe streets” — well, they certainly aren’t encumbered by any dangerous pedestrians. I guess they mean that the streets are safe for car drivers to be as aggressive as they want without fear of having their speedy trips interrupted by cyclists or pedestrians.

Jim, it’s not if they have a policy of creating infrastructure like bike lanes and bike boulevards. Urban areas are much easier to navigate by bike and foot than suburban areas because of the grid pattern, which makes travel much more efficient than winding suburban roadways. Adding the same bike infrastructure to protect cyclists in suburban areas would be cumbersome and expensive.

They still have neighborhoods with sidewalks and driveways with kids riding their bikes and folks firing up the grill. Yes, it’s not perfect. Yes, it’s not ideal. But why not take some time to find out what residents think about living there? You can’t assume everything about the community.

But Moira, that’s not how these rankings were done. It’s purely quantitative data that’s used to determine the “best place,” without any consideration for things like traffic, mobility, and community. The same way I can’t assume everything without speaking to residents, neither should Money.

I think I have a unique perspective on this because I live in Fort Collins (where the beer is indeed plentiful and tasty) and my brother lives in Eden Praire. Eden Praire seems like it is a very pleasant place. It is true that it has no downtown, but I believe that there have been some planning efforts to address this. It has some places that are walkable, my brother can walk to the park and to Walgreens, although the walk would be shorter if the street pattern were more grid based. Outside of the Old Town area of Fort Collins, there is plenty of suburban development that is hardly walkable, but still very pleasant with plenty of park space. Another thing that Fort Collins has going for it, besides beer, is a commitment to making the City bicycle friendly.

To say that it isn’t walkable, is an assumption only made by someone who hasn’t been there. I will admit that I am biased because I grew up there. No one really uses the city hall perhaps like other small cities do. A lot of the activity centers around the community center, the high school, and the parks. There are a lot of hiking and biking trails that go down into the Minnesota Valley that Google Maps wouldn’t cover. Have you seen all the bikes and walkers along Dell Road and Pioneer Trail?

As for economic development, Eden Prairie CENTER used to be a dead and abandoned mall a few years ago and it took years of renovation just to bring that part of the city to live. Like every other mall, of course it’s concrete. This part of town brings a great percentage of revenue into the city but just because it’s there, it doesn’t mean that the city is any less green than any other suburban place.

The city is active and we take pride in our school system and parks. Like every other suburbs, a lot of the development took place before people even considered the green movement that cars are a common mode of transportation. There’s a bus system…or perhaps you overlooked that too.

I think my point was less about Eden Prairie and more about suburbs in general. Seventeen of the top twenty cities on Money’s list are suburbs… all suburbs with low density, little uniqueness, and no sense of place. A few parks, hiking trails (designed for recreation, by the way, not mobility) and a good school system don’t make a city great. They might boost civic pride, but they don’t sort out the main problems: living far from key employment centers, making most trips by car, being psychologically (and sometimes physically) isolated from neighbors, and most importantly – not having a central place of activity and commerce that the city (suburb) can call its own.

Think of it this way: if these suburbs are such great places, why don’t people boast of them when they travel? No one says they’re from Apple Valley or Rowlett or Brookline or Highlands Ranch. They say they’re from the Twin Cities, Dallas, Boston, and Denver.

Ooh, I felt a jolt of pride at hearing Newton, MA mentioned. Granted, I live a few towns over now, but I think it’s quite a special place from an urban-planning perspective. It’s probably one of the most walkable places on earth, compared with the average size of lots and houses.

I have to admit that l roll my eyes when I learn that E.P. is #1 (I don’t think this is the first time). I grew up here, tested out other places, then ended up here with my parents due to my lame understanding of finances. Without a car, this place is total isolation. Bus schedules are coming along, but are designed for commuters. It is nice that my parents live in a neighborhood where the neighbors get together, and that mall sure is a plus when it’s freezing outside. But, it is just a mall. I hear the city is planning on making a downtown, which sounds optimistic. When the weather permits, there are lots of places to go and do via bike, which is really great.

I think posts like yours are really counter-productive. Not all Suburbs are as you describe (See Carmel, IN number 14 it is a big center of employment) and although my hometown (Fishers, IN) I do think ranked a little too high, its on its way to being it’s own little city with companies slowly moving in (even during this recession).

Even if I lived downtown Indianapolis, everything I want to do is in the suburbs. I rarely travel to downtown (a few times a year), but do shop at my locally owned restaurants and businesses here in the burbs. Even my job is in the suburbs.

Also, why hate strip malls so much? I can go to dinner, go get drinks, haircut, drugstore, etc while only driving or riding my bike to one place.

My point being, if we keep attacking each other (city dwellers attacking suburbs for being ” sprawl, office parks, strip malls, ununique” and suburbanites attacking the city for being “crime ridden and unsafe”) we don’t make progress. People aren’t going to just up and move so why not focus on what we can do to improve these places other than just move.

There are plenty of suburbs that actually embrace some of the very things that I often credit urban areas for having. Some of them even made this list. #3 on Money’s list, Newton, Massachusetts, as one commenter above mentioned, is a very walkable community that is also very safe. #4, Bellevue, Washington, has a dense downtown and is on the verge of connecting to Seattle via light rail. Carmel, IN has truly embraced concepts of new urbanism and has a great biking infrastructure that encourages bike use for recreation and commuting. But of this list, the great majority have not learned any lessons from these towns, and in some cases, continue to make sprawl worse, despite public opinion moving in the opposite direction.

Yes, there are plenty of ways for suburbs like Eden Prairie to improve, but when someone rewards them with being a “best place to live,” it certainly doesn’t rally the troops to make improvements.

Fishers (#8) is a great example for this discussion.’ I’ll talk about what we know, but you could substitute about 92 other suburbs for Fishers in our comments.

I also live in Fishers, and I totally understand the allure. This is a very good place to live for a family of four, and if you work in the burbs I can see how there is no reason for you to go downtown or anywhere else. For you, this lifestyle works.

That is not to say that Fishers is a good ‘place’ though, or even a ‘place’ at all. Like Chris, I get caught up in Money’s definition of “place,” because in the professional planning sense of the word, most of the burbs on the list are not “places” (in Money’s defense, I don’t think they put any thought into this. They probably didn’t want to use ‘city’ or ‘town’ because it wouldn’t apply to everywhere on their list).

Like most burbs, Fishers is full of huge roads, few sidewalks, tons of traffic, and snaking, disconnected WIDE suburban streets lined with drug-addicted ChemLawns and lollipop trees. We have thousands of nearly-identical, cheap, mass-produced beige homes. Strip malls are a perfect example of what’s wrong here: you have to drive to 99% of them (maybe you can ride your bike to the ONE or TWO that are within a mile of your house), they’re at least 2:1 pavement to building and about 1000:1 hard scape to green, and once there you don’t even walk from store to store because the entrances are too far apart.

There is no choice here. We can’t walk anywhere (low density), we can’t bike anywhere (no sidewalks, no trails, no highway crossings for bikes, and lots of crazy drivers), and nothing about it is unique or original. Fishers is what happens when developers find cheap land and do the minimum to turn a quick profit, and I believe that Money Magazine does our cities and suburbs a major disservice by using this kind of meaningful nomenclature on these type of bedroom communities. We should have higher expectations for our communities.

Luckily, I’ve traveled enough to know that Fishers is not really the 8th best place to live in America unless you use Money’s VERY narrow criteria.

I’d say more than 92, I agree that most suburbs are like Fishers and its not really special in anyway. And I also agree that the criteria Money uses is flawed.

I do disagree that you can’t bike anywhere. Bikes aren’t made for sidewalks (cyclists are vehicles, not pedestrians) and that also solves the highway crossing issue. Take the lane and most drivers will be respectful in my experience. You walk a mile, you can easily bike up to 10 so yes I can get around by bike.

The “hardscape” argument is flawed, there are many more trees/green spaces in the suburbs than the city. I don’t doubt your ratios, but I don’t understand how that makes the ‘burbs worse than a city. I’m still not against strip malls because I can get most my errands done in one place.

“Also, why hate strip malls so much? I can go to dinner, go get drinks, haircut, drugstore, etc while only driving or riding my bike to one place. ”

a joke, right? my guess is, though you COULD drive (or bicycle) to only one place, you don’t…. or at least I hope you don’t have to ride your bike to a dinner date or for drinks after work.

strip malls also rarely contain all the amenities people need or want anymore (in part a reason the Wal-K-Target-Marts are so popular… I’ve never seen a bike rack in front of one of these stores by the way… at least, not one with a bicycle in it).

it’s great that everything you want to do is in the ‘burbs. you prefer that lifestyle. but don’t try to make it out to be more than it is. and if your idea of a nice meal involves dining at a strip mall (pad site?) restaurant… well, next time ask for the outdoor seating (if there is any) where you can enjoy the delightful atmosphere that is looking out across the parking lot… oh joy!

Beeker, I don’t think the previous commenter is trying to say that suburbs are perfect. But they can’t be flat out rejected. Many of the arguments made against suburbs make a lot of assumptions, e.g. “my guess is, though you COULD drive (or bicycle) to only one place, you don’t.” Haha, how do you know? PS I used to bike to Target all the time, which was located in……a strip mall in one of the densest cities in the country. Cities and suburbs are not polarized.

And Beeker, for the record the locally owned places are in strip malls due to cheaper real estate. So please, if you ever find yourself outside the city please look at these places for a meal, they are where the nice, fresh, local fare can be found.

of course they’re not perfect, neither is the city – note I didn’t claim perfection for either of these places. But to suggest that one of the assets of the suburbs is that you can bicycle to a strip mall to meet all your retail/dining needs seems terribly disingenuous. This isn’t any different than people who heap generous accolades on the city or new urbanist development as if *those* places are without flaw. Obvioiusly, this isn’t about one place being inherently devoid of any qualities and the other being entirely flawless.

it’s also fairly naive to say strip malls even MEET all our needs anymore. the strip mall of 50 years ago may have had a butcher, cleaners, drug store, bank, etc. but they’re incredibly fragemented in todays market….unless you’re looking to get your nails done, it seems nail salons are the most common staple of the strip mall.

as for restaurants, perhaps you read more into my post than intended. the slight wasn’t necessarily the quality of the restaurant (though, strip malls are often characterized by their generic chain eateries), but rather the character of the place itself. the “charm” of a strip mall restaurant often includes drop ceilings and “outdoor seating” overlooking 5 acres of parking. agian… if that’s quality ambience to you, then we’re soooooo different. and despite my lack of explicit knowledge of Nicole’s travel habits, I highly doubt she ever bicycles to any of these places for dinner or drinks. How do I know that?? I don’t… but odds are heavily in my favor, to deny that is willful ignorance.

you bike to Target, congratulations. You’re the exception that proves the rule… that rule being any suburban strip mall I’ve ever been to has many more cars than bicycles. many more parking spaces than bike racks. in fact, as I noted, I’ve never seen a bicycle in a bike rack – if one exists – at any one of these places. again, I’m going to assume that if I asked any one of the folks who drove to Target why they liked shopping there, they’d include “plenty of parking” well before “I can bike here!”

Eden Prairie also boasts the most confusing roadway network of all twin cities suburbs. I used to work in EP and was consistently getting lost in the circular road system. I had to have a car to go for lunch, happy hour or anything else there. I’m happy to be in downtown Mpls instead.

Its approach. If you can explain a different lifestyle without berating one that someone currently has They will respond positively. For example to get someone to eat less meat you don’t call them savage carnivores, you show/prepare them meatless meals.

I would be interested to see how many of these people would allow their teens the freedom they say they would have loved. We are in the age of helicopter parents after all…

Pointing out the plain facts of the plight of suburban sprawl, especially its unsustainability, isn’t unproductive hositility. You can’t sugarcoat the facts so people feel okay with suburbia. Now, you also shouldn’t aim to make them feel guilty and miserable, but blog posts like this are what gets people fired up about improving cities.

It sounds like you want unproductive docility where everybody just decides to “agree to disagree” and our REAL places decline even further.

Joe, if that’s the way I came off I completely apologize. I don’t suggest we sugar coat reality, but the tone of the post just stuck me as a little off (and its completely possible I misread the tone). Bit saying where I spend a majority of my time doesn’t even count as a place just stuck me as a divisive approach.

I don’t want to agree to disagree, but want suggestions to improve our suburbs. Someone like me is never going to live in the city ( too far from recreation, friends, and family. Plus, I hate crowds.) I personally would like to see these conversations shift from the suburbs suck and here’s why to the suburbs suck and here’s how we can fix it.

And just as a point of disclosure, I was prompted to write my opinion here because of the article being featured on grist.org and they were also wondering if the topic was divisive. I posted here instead of there so the blog owner could get the extra hits, Google rating, and advertising.

The folks in Eden Praire might be justifiably proud to have achieved the recognition by Money Magazine. Low crime and good schools are laudable accomplishments, and many people there are no doubt satisfied with their quality of life.

However, I think that Money Magazine did a poor job to set their formula to come up with a “best” place to live. As you point out in this blog, they failed to address livability or a sense of place. This is difficult to measure by numbers, but perhaps they might look specifically at walkability. One metric that they might employ is walkscore.com:

Eden Pririe scores a 37 (“Car-Dependent — A few amenities within walking distance.”). Walkscore is far from perfect (read the disclaimer on the site itself), but the fact that Money Magazine does not consider walkability says something about Money Magazine’s priorities and their evaluation of their audience’s needs. However, as our population ages, walkability will be important for retirees to enjoy and socialize in a particular area, rather than face isolation, particularly if they do not drive anymore. Walkability has been shown to contribute to increased property values–something important as real estate values change over time. Walkability can give people opportunities to exercise and increase and maintain their health. Locating in a car-dependent area may pose risks to children’s health–see the statistics on obesity or accidental causes of death for young people. It is a tragedy to see so many young people lost to car accidents, many as a result of extreme car dependency.

The formula employed by Money Magazine is too simplistic, and it sometimes skews toward “safe” areas that score well on obvious (but worthy, in isolation) metrics at the expense of livability, which is more difficult to measure. Indeed, young people should look carefully at these “best places” and reconsider them if they require car-dependency as a cost of residency. Their lives may depend on it!

I think a lot of people are missing the point. Eden Prairie (or Highlands Ranch which is closer to my neck of the woods) may be very pleasant places to live for some types of people.

But “Best Place To Live?” Really? So of the hundreds upon hundreds of cities in the United States, large and small…these are the kinds of “places” that are the “best places to live?”

Look, all decisions about location have trade-offs. Lower crime often means more remote from certain types of amenities. Lower price may indicate longer commute times to jobs. Some people find these trade-offs to be acceptable, or the trade-offs are appropriate for their lifestyle.

It cuts both ways, however. I’d rather deal with a slightly higher crime rate but be able to live near a medium sized urban center (Denver, Austin, Portland or Charlotte come to mind.) I’d rather pay a little more for my housing but be comforted by the fact that I’m not paying much on transportation because I live so near where I work…and also where I spend most of my time at play.

Either way the measure is completely subjective, but I would scarcely consider some of these sleepy suburbs “best places to live”…they simply do not meet my criteria…at all. It’s a shame that Money Magazine can make such a selection with no regard for the hidden costs that go into living in places like Eden Prairie.

It’s easy to judge a suburban town when you’re a city planner or designer, but an urban vs. suburban argument does little to help the cause of improving mobility and livability at a regional level.

I was born and raised in the suburbs and have some of my best memories there. Now, as a city planner, I live in an urban area which I prefer, but I don’t look down on the suburbs. Different lifestyle, different choice. The important thing is making sure people who choose the suburbs have options. Options of housing types, of transportation modes, and recreation.

Don’t forget, most of the developed land area in the U.S. is suburbs, exurbs, and the like. If we can find ways to improve these huge geographical areas, the benefits touch way more people than if we solely concentrated on cities.

your diplomacy is noted. however, the problem with suburbs isn’t that it doesn’t have merit – with regards a certain lifestyle. rather, its gross inefficiencies as a way to live/work/play/educate, etc. it’s simply not sustainable w/o all of the various subsidies afforded by fed/state/local governments (as well as the enabling private utility firms).

i might also add that your notion of choice is spot on. however, I think the problem isn’t that SUBURBANITES don’t have choices… it’s that going on 70 years, we’ve only built a very limted choice of housing options… single family detached (on 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 acre)!!!! when considering how balanced our options are… it’s hard to make an argument there is any.

and your point about the majority of developed land area being suburban in nature proves both of mine.

I’ve seen “place ratings” that seem to favor towns/suburbs/cities in areas like Minnesota and Wisconsin (e.g. Madison WI, with the University and the State Capitol has lots of jobs that are not sensitive to the business cycle). I’m a native of Southern California, and any place that gets covered with snow in the winter is off my list. Where I live, we can look up at the mountains and see snow, but it doesn’t come down to our elevation and make life miserable. Also, my theory on low crime up north is that most of the bums come to California, or other Sun Belt locations; those that don’t freeze to death and won’t cause any trouble in that condition. Plus, it’s a lot easier to track criminals if they leave footprints in snow. (the last two comments may be taken with a grain, but only a grain, of salt.)

What I’ve always found to be à very relavent statistic for measuring quality of life among Western European and North American cities, is annual Per capita transit ridership. Think Oklahoma City versus Montreal. Eden Prarie I am sure has only limited low ridership bus service. Money’s number 3 ranking, Newton, MA by comparison has much higher transit ridership than Eden Prarie. However if Money were to take transit ridership into consideration as they should, Newton would rank lower than neighboring Brookline, MA which is much more pedestrian oriented has higher transit
ridership than Newton.

“It was pretty obvious from reading the Money article that their metrics were narrow and quantitative.”

even that makes it sound more legit that it should. the editors [obviously?] qualitatively selected their “narrow and quantitative” criteria based on what they valued… or based on what they thought their readers valued (e.g. single family detached homes, good schools, shopping opportunities, low crime, etc.)

the biggest “duh” to the list is that they used unemployment and forclosure data. it seems self-evident that places where people have good jobs, make good money, own their homes (and can afford them!) would be a place with… good schools, low crime… blah blah blah… that doesn’t sound quantitative as much as loading the deck.

That’s not a picture of the entrance to Eden Prairie City Hall. That’s a picture of the entrance to Eden Prairie City Hall 6-7 years ago before they renovated it. You got it off Google Maps, I just checked. The main entrance to EP’s city hall are the double doors that say, “City Hall Main Entrance.” The Police station and the City hall are connected in the same building, that’s why there are many entrances. Have you ever been to Eden Prairie? Based on what you said, I don’t think you have. You obviously just blew through it on Google maps. I live a block away from Eden Prairie City hall. I walk to restaurants, and the mall all the time. It takes about 30min to get there, but I can enjoy the scenery of purgatory creek on my way there. There are a lot of places in Eden Prairie that have wilderness, you can‘t see them on Google maps. Since Eden Prairie isn’t very big or an important city. Google maps only photographed the busiest streets of Eden Prairie. Google maps didn’t show any of the parks, the lakes, or the prairies, which we do have by the way. Constructing an argument about a city based on what you saw by looking at the 7 year old photos of a few main roads isn’t very wise. I’m sure most people would come to the conclusion that Eden Prairie is for driving. You’re argument is flawed and full of holes.

Also, to make a better argument, you shouldn’t have talked about how Eden Prairie is a tree-less cemented over city and then posted an unflattering picture, to show how crappy EP is, that shows an abundance of trees. You should of found a picture of Eden Prairie that had no trees in it at all. Granted, this would be hard to do since Eden Prairie ‘has a ‘Tree City USA’ status.

Alex, the front doors and street entrance are two very different things. The Google photograph above is the street entrance to the city center, from the Mitchell Road side, and it’s dated from less than two years ago. The whole purpose of showing the street entrance is showing how unfriendly its design is for pedestrians. A basic principle of good urban design is less setback from major roads. For you to get to the front door you mention, you have to walk over this ridge along the sidewalk and across the parking lot. The same holds true for the malls and restaurants you walk to. As you even admit, “Eden Prairie is for driving.” That’s exactly the problem; driving is an anti-social activity that doesn’t allow people to interact with each other, which builds stronger communities and a better sense of place.

I think you completely misunderstood my reasoning. I didn’t say that the entirety of Eden Prairie was paved over. If I was making that argument, I’d bash New York City for even existing. Parks are great, but parks don’t make places. Downtowns make places. Downtowns are a center of social and business activity. Eden Prairie doesn’t have one.

As for your argument about “Tree City USA,” it’s a recognition that’s applied for, not awarded. Any city can have plenty of trees and be unfriendly to people who want to walk or bike places. New York City is a “Tree City USA,” too.

I’ve lived in New York City (actually in Forest Hills in the borough of Queens- 20 minutes from midtown on the subway) all my life. Now I know that puts me on a lot of people’s s–t list. But – WTF do you do in a place like this to pass the time: go to the mall, watch the grass grow?
Certainly Forest Hills Gardens here in Queens would be a far better candidate. It’s a garden community designed as a whole at the turn of the last century, you can walk to absolutely everything: every type of store, restaurant, theater – a car is wholly unnecessary – and you’re 20 minutes from midtown Manhattan on a subway or commuter railroad train. How do you beat that?
Oh, and did I mention: we have trees, grass, and you can have a backyard if you like.

About the Author

Chris O'Leary is a transportation geek who has been reading and drawing maps since the age of 3. He thinks he knows far more than he does, but shares his somewhat informed opinions about mass transit, roads, and urban design here. He was born in Rhode Island and lives in New York City. He hates writing about himself in the third person.